| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
SiegeTanksandBlueGoo
China685 Posts
Seriously though, the problem I have with copying good biulds is that I always end up cutting a probe or something for a second. I always feel like if I played better I don't have to cut a probe for a second to get in that 13 core in PvT, but I can never do it. Advice? | ||
|
Seraphim
United States4467 Posts
| ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36374 Posts
think of it like a real sport, there are a few exceptions but in basketball in general you need to jump high, be tall, and be coordinated/athletic, and then you can learn about footwork, jump shots, and where to move on defense. sure you can play basketball without the height/speed/jumping ability and even play it very well, but you won't be the best in the world. the same is for SC--you need a base level of handspeed and multitask that to an extent can be practiced (like speed and jump can be trained in basketball) but innately there are different ceilings and limits for everyone. You need these aspects to be elite before even thinking about strategy. unfortunately this isn't reality. its NOT good when strategy is the biggest part of the game because for computer games, there are easily reachable limits to strategy. yes SC is still evolving but its mainly adjusting to maps and metagame, not the basics. there are few new revolutionary strategies on a basic level--nothing is going to change the "base" tactics of vultures and tanks vs protoss and mm vs zerg. where players can differentiate themselves is mechanics, speed, etc. that's what makes a sport a sport and a game a game, when certain players are better and no matter what most of the people do, they won't get as good as the best. that's where high skill differentiation comes in. and its good for SC, not bad. but to sum up, a lot of people hate it that mechanics > strategy because it basically kills any chance of being very good for a large portion of the community. there is always a general sentiment that whats inside (smarts, personality, etc) should matter more than innate outer qualities (physical ability, looks), because you can control one much more than the other. for many players and fans, they see the mechanics as physical, less controllable quality and strategy as "whats on the inside" so they feel its more genuine or fair to win by strategy than pure mechanics, because it means that anyone, even those that aren't fast like themselves, can be great. that's why people love the short players in the NBA, because its hope that anyone can be great at basketball regardless of height. this obviously just isn't true and the few short players are truly rare exceptions to a rule. its a hard reality to face for a lot of people, that they just can't be great. | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36374 Posts
i actually want the opposite. i want a game that there are strong strategy elements but the baseline skill indicator is a heavy dose of mechanics. that's what will make the game last a long time in esports and thats what makes the skill differentiation wide. that's what makes it a true sport and not checkers. all the difficult and great strategies in starcraft are made possible by superior mechanics anyway (see bisu, defiler control, sk terran, etc), not by someone who thinks better than his opponent. you can think like nada just by watching and mimicking his replays, you can't ever play like him though. thats why it doesn't matter how much you try to copy him. i hope this type of "can copy strategically, can't copy mechanically" aspect remains in SC2, because you just CAN'T consistently outstrategize someone every time. innovation only works once, and after that everyone's aware and they are just as smart and will beat you. mechanical separation is needed for longevity and consistency. | ||
|
Naib
Hungary4843 Posts
On September 15 2008 01:21 Morello wrote: Believe it or not its a fact.And u douche please tell me what I win by lie for such thing!? Anyway I'm ex-Warcraft3 player and I must tell you that I've noticed how bad foreigners train, I'm playing for one not so good team and I've been asking them to practise with me almost non stop and after week and couple of days in I've played only 15-20 games with them.In warcraft the best practise comes from training in ggc(garena) with teammates because the bnet is corrupted with hackers since 9-11 months.Its really easy to progress when you can train one matchup a lot and there are people watching and pointing your mistakes.Of course if u don't have team just ask some better players when you to practise with them and watch your replay for mistakes. I've said it many times and I'll repeat it again ,thanks iMp players and thanks letalis for training with me. Be good ,get good or give up Less talk, more proof. Artosis is correct he just didn't elaborate everything perfectly, hence the discussion. He's there observing them firsthand anyway. This should be obvious anyway, just as Chill said. | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36374 Posts
That said dunno why NergalSC is so resistant and upset that someone can get good in a short period of time. If hes telling the truth, we'll see him winning WCG for his country or at least placing, if hes lying or if he just reached his ceiling really fast, we'll never hear from him again. Only one of these results are impressive and frankly nobody should care right now, he's just another B player amid a sea of B players. | ||
|
Cham
797 Posts
| ||
|
NergalSC
Poland186 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
people are resistant to this idea because people hate it when they are just excluded from being good. apm and mechanics can be practiced but the perception is that for raw speed and multitask, there are physical limits, kind of like height and coordination in basketball. some people have it, some people don't. the truth is right there in front of you when your opponent is faster and better. whereas strategy seems to be this abstract concept that the everyman thinks he can learn and beat people with. there's something more egalitarian and attractive about strategy trumping speed (ie out-thinking an opponent who has better mechanics). i remember thinking that when i read that speed freaks article. "isnt that when you're supposed to think" as if he could have thought up some insane genius strategy to crush the people who knew what they were doing given a minute or two. it would be nice if people would take hot_bids posts to heart, the stuff hes talking about is the root cause of alot of the dumbass discussions about sc2. | ||
|
dream-_-
United States1857 Posts
| ||
|
khersai
Poland366 Posts
| ||
|
ForVengeance
United States111 Posts
| ||
|
Polemarch
Canada1564 Posts
Compare Jaedong and Upmagic. Jaedong excelled at zvt and zvz first, matchups where mechanics and small-scale tactics are key. He sucked at zvp for a long time, which requires more strategy. Then after having built up his zerg mechanics to the best in the world, he started focusing more on strategy. Now he's one of the most dominant players around. Upmagic started off by doing innovative, strategic builds that caught people off guard. He had some reasonably good results for a while, but once people learned to play more cautiously against him and he revealed his strategies, he's not doing so well because he didn't invest the time into building his basic mechanics. His coach Daniel Lee complained about this in one of his commentaries. Bottom line: if your goal is long-term improvement, you should focus mostly on mechanics in day-to-day practise. Then before important tournaments, etc., work more on strategy as a finishing touch. | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36374 Posts
On September 15 2008 03:36 khersai wrote: wow, Hot_Bid said just exactly what I wanted too! Well, almost. Anyway "mechanics > strategy" is why I've pretty much given up on practicing SC. That makes me a "thinker" I suppose. Love watching pros though, cause only when their mechanics skills are comparable then the scouting, build order and strategy start to be deciding factors. So basically it's like you have to have great mechanics before your strategy skills can be of the most use, not the opposite way. But in the end it's the strategy that makes you the best and that's where Hot_Bid is kinda wrong, cause there are things you cannot train, you're born with it or not. Just like in the game of chess or bridge. Some are good, some don't get it. Hell, you could even train a monkey to execute some build order perfectly, but does it make it a good player ? well look at it in terms of separation, ability, and cause i'm sure many people thought of using dts and corsairs in the way bisu did. i am sure there are plenty of people as creative as he is at making build orders. however, his dt/sair FE opening and harass style is a strategical result of his mechanics. nobody can do it but he can, whereas a large % of the population can at least formulate a strategy like he can. i'm not sure how much of the strat he came up with himself or how much was a result of a combination of coach / players / partners ideas, but conceptually sc strategies aren't very complex. sure, sometimes a truly great strategy comes out that is shocking (see silver build on monty) but my point is you can never rely on innovation, because it only works once and is quickly dissected by opponents just as smart as you are. sure boxer and savior and nada are born with a level of analytical and strategic ability, and this mental part separates them from others who are just as mechanically talented, but the bottom line is we're talking about people that are all ridiculously fast. if you talk about two guys with equal mechanics, obviously work ethic and a quick brain will separate them. but how many times have you seen a player with inferior mechanics consistently beat players with better mechanics? its just way too difficult because we're not talking about idiots and geniuses. most of these guys are relatively bright, and can think without being an idiot. sure there are dumb moves by pros and exceptions to the rule, but you're just not going to out-strategize someone to the level you want to without the mechanics to back it up. it just doesn't happen, not in Korea where mass proteam practice has pros basically prepared for all scenarios and strategies and timings. the line for strategical innovation is just so, so thin, and there's no way someone is going to be able to do it every time. then look at how many times you've seen someone make up for a deficiency in strategy with superior macro or micro--it happens far more frequently. | ||
|
NergalSC
Poland186 Posts
 | ||
|
Stimpacked
Philippines368 Posts
| ||
|
Knickknack
United States1187 Posts
Clearly mechanics are the basic. Like macro is before micro. Have to have units before you can micro them. What exactly is mechanics basic to though? Strategy is what is being thrown out there by some. It is important to keep in mind that strategy and mechanics are not divorced from each other in game. You use your mechanics (technique) to carry out a certain strategy (game plan). They both matter a lot to winning, but I agree that (in the abstract) mechanics comes first. To get even more subtle here...and this matters to the NergalSC disagreement. Notice that Artosis does not say that strategy does not matter to Koreans. He says that the Koreans have the game plan all mapped out, an that map is becoming more and more standard. What the deal with the foreigners is is something like the typical foreigner not cutting it in mechanics, and also relying on being creative/cleaver/outthinking/whatever in game. I recall something by Nony where he said thaut he tries to get as much of his plan into his head beforehand so it is instantly available to his mechanics...aka...korean style, eh. Another point to make is that mechanics can be counted on in and out, every game. Strategy is pretty iffy though. Much of the time you just don't have the scouting on your opponent in order to decide what to do correctly. SC is not qite rock paper scissors, but we admit that it has some chancy aspects. On a point of interest, you (artosis) typed that "there is very little high level discussion in the foreigner scene." Is this statement showing an assumption of high level discussion in the kor scene? Care to talk about this some more? I'm not sure I see this at all going from Daniel Lees commentary, etc. Honestly, from what I see from time to time of progamers talking about deep strategy it has been disappointing. I get the impression they are talking after the fact about why the game went successful/bad for them. Sure, you demonstrated that they have the builds down, but how deep is their strategy discussion, if you get my meaning? Perhaps this rolls into your point somehow. Maybe they don't really discuss it deeply, realizing the nature of the game (or at least what will make them better), and just go and play and adapt. v reply to bellow: Yea it could be mainly that. Or it could perhaps be more what I suggest...which would be more interesting/revealing alternative. Obviously players still think a lot about strategy whether foreigner or korean, but the point is how much of that discussion is in the scene over there, that is, open discussion. And how does this matter to developing players? Is there a popular korean strategy forum for sc? Or just at an inteam level how much sharing of high level strategy goes on verbally/written? I suspect the answer is not that much. They just talk about it some or 'what works' and play a lot. | ||
|
0xDEADBEEF
Germany1235 Posts
On September 15 2008 05:05 Knickknack wrote: On a point of interest, you (artosis) typed that "there is very little high level discussion in the foreigner scene." Is this statement showing an assumption of high level discussion in the kor scene? Care to talk about this some more? I'm not sure I see this at all going from Daniel Lees commentary, etc. Honestly, from what I see from time to time of progamers talking about deep strategy it has been disappointing. I get the impression they are talking after the fact about why the game went successful/bad for them. So just how high level is their strategy discussion? Perhaps this rolls into your point somehow. Maybe they don't really discuss it deeply, realizing the nature of the game (or at least what will make them better), and just go and play and adapt. Internally (within the pro team) probably a lot... externally, well, it's just like pre- or post-game interviews with sports stars from other sports: rarely interesting, almost always the same talk... "i played well, i hope i'll win it all", "i was nervous and kinda sucked", "after <big obvious mistake> i knew i would win/lose" - great insightful stuff indeed. | ||
|
onepost
Canada297 Posts
The equivalent for the game of Go would be joseki. Everybody agrees that learning josekis (sequences tested by professional Go players; equivalent to SC's standard build orders) is good, but learning when to use them is better. Those who play by the book (joseki) without looking at the whole board get raped by those who do. This is what happens with amateur players, almost regardless of their rank: they know build orders, but have no clue when to use them, resulting in bizarre, head-scratching build orders. The issue of the game rests mostly on micro and luck. My favourite example: IefNaij vs Kal. He stuck to his FE build plan despite Kal's rush. He knew he'd be late, he should have known that he needed units ASAP and pressure lest he'd get raped, hence delay his natural expo. The coach had the very same reflex: DON'T EXPAND! Obviously an S-class player wouldn't forgive a mistake of this magnitude. Making matters worse, IefNaij went for a THIRD base right after, a fatal mistake he didn't even survive. IefNaij is the perfect example of an amateur player with good mechanics, good micro, but poor judgement when facing the unexpected. This is what top-class korean pros have but amateurs haven't. | ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV European League
Scarlett vs Percival
Jumy vs ArT
YoungYakov vs Shameless
uThermal vs Fjant
Nicoract vs goblin
Harstem vs Gerald
FEL
Big Brain Bouts
RotterdaM283
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
ByuN vs Cham
herO vs Reynor
FEL
RSL Revival
Clem vs Classic
SHIN vs Cure
FEL
BSL: ProLeague
Dewalt vs Bonyth
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
